Oops I listened to the rest of the video I started and it seems Nate has missed the concept of Kardashev Money / Wealth, he still seems to talk of debt as something purely financial, owed to the financial creditors, rather than an energy deficit to the planet. And yet he has spotted GDP is a measure of energy. I guess that would undermine his perception of sustainability, hence the reason he maintains we have to somehow explicitly scale down.

Also he doesn’t see the market as an appropriate regulating mechanism whereas I do, with the caveat that no-one will be trading for profit, after we go completely solar.
That would be where we differ, for now I think.